UNION OF INDIA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. arise out of the order passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate, Udaipur dated 28 -3 -81.

(2.) THE matter relates to a criminal case instituted against four accused viz., Gangsingh, Nandlal, Ramesh Chandra and Gehrilal, regarding the theft of gold and other articles said to be belonging to Yogeshwari Devi from a room in Shiv Niwas Palace. On the charge -sheet being filed against the aforesaid persons, the learned Munsif Mag. charge -sheeted Gangsingh and Nandlal for the offences under Sections 454/457 and 380 I.P.C., and the other two accused for the offences under Sections 411 and 424 I.P.C. Gangsingh pleaded guilty to the charges and was convicted and sentenced by the judgment dated 7 -7 -75. Trial proceeded against the remaining three accused and they were held guilty and sentenced by the judgment dated 28 -3 -81. The learned Magistrate heard the parties regarding the disposal of the property. The learned counsel for the complainant and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor prayed that the articles recovered during the course of investigation may be returned to the complainant. On the other hand on 11 -3 -82, an application under Section 110 of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was filed by the Customs Department with the request that the Gold may be entrusted to the Custom Department for disposal according to the provisions of the Act and be not returned to the complainant. The learned Magistrate after hearing the parties and looking to the material produced on behalf of the complainant rejected the application filed by the Customs Department and ordered that the recovered gold may be returned to the complainant with a further order that in case Customs Department considers it necessary, separate proceedings in that regards may be initiated. It is in grievance to that order for the disposal of the gold involved in the case that the Union of India has come to this Court for relief under Section 482 Cr.P.C. read with Section 392 Cr. P.C. which has been registered as Original Misc. Petition under Section 482 Cr. P.C.

(3.) CONTROVERTING these contentions, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the provisions of appeal are not applicable to the present case, when without there being any authority to do so, the learned Magistrate has ordered for return of the gold to the complainant. The learned counsel referred to certain authorities to substantiate his argument that even in case when other remedy is available, Courts have not declined to exercise inherent powers to cure the abuse of the process of the court by subordinate courts.